Educational impact of study abroad in secondary education

Ashley Eschenburg, M.A.T.

Salisbury University
James M. Bennett High School

As a former student of two captivating study abroad experiences, the rich travel experiences that
happily replay in my memory every so often can be too many to ascribe words. They have affected my
well-being not only as an adult, but as a professional, a world language learner, and a world citizen. While
I may find it challenging to put in to wordsask me and I will happily endeavorthese benefits that
manifest themselves in who I am at this very moment, in writing this piece, and who I hope and challenge
myself to be in the future. I like to think about lifes happy and unforgiving events as building blocks.
Study abroad gives its traveler a strong footing, providing a strong foundation for the next and bigger
step. While it is difficult to quantify these benefits into a scorecard for use in the realm of education as a
platform to promote study abroad at the secondary level, there is a silver lining for those who wish to see
the data.
The challenges in tackling the effectiveness of study abroad proliferate for many reasons: there
are myriad goals of study abroad, a lack of standardization and assessment tools in study abroad
programs, and a limited extent of which study abroad has been studied. That being said, it is difficult to
deny the overarching effects of study abroad in terms of linguistic and cultural benefits, as well as in
cognitive and affective benefits which are, after all, goals in world language education. Based on my own
experiences of studying abroad, I would like to attempt to characterize its functions and to quantify the
results of study abroad based on research of educational, scholarly, and peer-reviewed articles in hopes to
articulate its effectiveness.
Study abroad is the broad term given to programs that provide opportunities for individuals,
mostly students, to learn firsthand not only about the culture and language of a placeone, of which, they
may be unfamiliar but to also examine their own language and culture from another point of view.
There are numerous reasons for which individuals choose to enter such programs. In the simplest of
terms, it is to experience authentic language and culture; it is not the learning context per se that
promotes various types of learning but rather, as some have always believed [] the nature of the
interactions, the quality of the experiences, and the efforts made to use the [second language] that render

one context superior to another with respect to language gain (Context of learning and second language
fluency in French: Comparing regular classroom, Study Abroad and intensive domestic immersion
programs, 2004, p. 298). By far the most simple and profound way to learn is by doing.
Furthermore, the biggest problems rest with the acceptance and agreement of certain truths by
researchers about study abroad, such as, that study abroad will improve an individuals foreign language
skills, not to mention similar, more nebulous claims of cultural enlightenment (p. 43).

Also, with the

limited research of study abroad as a whole, it becomes even more tedious to narrow in on study abroad at
the secondary level of education. The Institute of International Education reported that 270,604 American
students studied abroad for academic credit in higher education during the 2009-2010 academic year
(Study Abroad by U.S. Students Rose in 2009/10 with More Students Going to Less Traditional
Destinations, 2011 p. 1) whereas the Council on Standards for International Education Travel reported
that roughly 2,000 secondary students spent a semester or year abroad during the same time frame
(Widespread Interest in International Youth Exchange Reported, 2010, p. 1). This data does suggest,
however, a growing trend with 28,000 international students having come to the U.S. for study abroad, for
a world-wide total of 30,000 secondary students (p. 1). Therefore, university-level students are more
likely to study abroad than are secondary-level students.
Current discrepancies between post-secondary and secondary study abroad support the claim that
post-secondary students are provided better institutional accommodations than their secondary
counterparts, therefore explaining the current statistic of 2,000 American secondary students who have
studied abroad. Graduation requirements reflect a single discrepancy in that those middle/high school
students who spend a significant period abroad may not be able to graduate with their class as opposed to
college students who are likely to receive credit towards their degree (Send them packing: Study abroad
as an option for gifted students, 2000, p. 45). In addition, secondary school students who feel that they are
ready and mature enough for a study abroad experience while in middle/high school [do] require
advance planningparticularly for the gifted students, whose academic plate may already be full with

advanced courses required for a particular course of study at the college or graduate level, and
furthermore, students who have radically accelerated through their pre-collegiate training could thus run
into difficulties in meeting the age requirements for exchange programs aimed at the undergraduate (p.
44). In summation, middle and high school students must navigate different waters in planning their study
abroad. Nonetheless, no matter the difficulties in preparation for such an experience, returning students
exemplify results which are unique to the language learning experienced abroad.
Returning students from a study abroad experience feel like they have gone through a
transformation that is often difficult to articulate; when students return from a study abroad

program, feeling different is all too common (Study Abroad Expands Cultural View, Life Skills,
and Academic Experience, 1999, p. 11) :
But for Jessica Schwarz [after a semester in Bali], looking different seemed to make the
feeling more real, more apparent. "I was going to shave my head to make a physical
change, because there was nothing physical to show what I had been through," says
Schwarz, who finally cropped her long hair this past semester. "You come back and you
have the same friends, the same town, the same life, but you just went through this
incredible experience. (p. 11)
Many study abroad participants share the same experiences once they have returned to their native
countrythe feeling of having been changed by something bigger than themselveswhich begs the
question; how does a study abroad experience affect the world language student? To answer this question,
lets explore study abroad in consortium with formal instruction in the world language classroom, that is,
classroom-based instruction within the school setting (The effect of context and input conditions on oral
and written development: A Study Abroad perspective, 2011, p. 1). It is hypothesized that because each
of the two contexts has differential patterns of input exposure, both quantitatively and qualitatively, their
effect on the participants communicative and motivational development will also be different (p. 157).

Therefore, the study of individual learners profiles and the analysis of the cognitive mechanisms which
can be deployed in high quality exposure environment such as [study abroad] as opposed to [formal
instruction] can explain the patterns of development [that] learners undergo (p. 158). This adds a
cognitive layer to the affective results of study abroad as exemplified by the experience of Jessica
Schwarz and cognitively speaking, these patterns present themselves in oral and written competencies.
When compared to formal instructionwhich is limited to input within the boundaries of the
classroomstudy abroad exposes learners to substantial authentic language input in countless social
scenarios that require the learner to be an active participant that is appropriate to the target culture (p.
161). Furthermore, in a new study abroad context and faced with the need to communicate, often with no
time to think, learners have to do two things at once: communicate through the language and learn that
language (p. 158). This type of learning is implicit since it takes place through conversation so that
learners have no consciousness or awareness of the point at with learning takes place In contrast, in a
formal instruction context, input and output are fashioned by teachers to attend to form, to take risks
toward the ultimate objective of improving linguistic expertise (p. 161). Therefore, research shows a
stronger correlation between linguistic proficiency and study abroad than of formal instruction as a result
of the cognitive exigencies of study abroad.
Apropos linguistic abilities, research has shown study abroad to be superior to formal instruction
in terms of narrative abilities, fluency, lexical abilities, and overall oral proficiency (The effects of study
abroad vs. classroom contexts on Spanish SLA: Pedagogical and programmatic implications for
intermediate and advanced learners, 2006, p. 12). A 2004 study on the effect of classroom learning
versus study abroad found that learners in the study abroad group were able to carry out a dialogic
interaction with a native speaker in an academic interview situation with fewer communication gaps than
the [formal instruction] group (The effect of context of learning (classroom vs. Study Abroad) on the use
of communication strategies by learners of Spanish as a second language, 2004, p. 217). This finding
promotes the idea that study abroad allows for more opportunities to practice discursive strategies. This

discursive ability reflects oral fluency in the learners ease and smoothness of speech, which is produces
at more nativelike speed (Learning Context and its Effects on Second Language Acquisition, 2004, p.
164). Furthermore, learners significantly increased their use of [lexical] formulaic sequences as an effect
of the period spent abroad To summarize as a whole, [study abroad] participants spoke significantly
more fluently and with significantly more accurate language and made use of a significantly higher
number of formulas (The effect of context of learning (classroom vs. Study Abroad) on the use of
communication strategies by learners of Spanish as a second language, 2004, p. 174).
One rationalization of these linguistic gains may be related to a shift in the learners use of
communication strategies; away from a focus on form to a focus on meaning in that the demands of study
abroad do not allow for controlled processing[,] which entails breaking the flow of conversation to use
communication strategies[,] prior to automatic processing (The effects of study abroad vs. classroom
contexts on Spanish SLA: Pedagogical and programmatic implications for intermediate and advanced
learners, 2005, slide 21). Whereas controlled processing, which takes place in formal instruction, we
typically see time spent negotiating for redundant grammatical form and the expectation that learners
will receive aid from the interlocutor and may therefore use more communication strategies (The effects
of study abroad vs. classroom contexts on Spanish SLA: Pedagogical and programmatic implications for
intermediate and advanced learners, 2006, p. 11). However, in contrast to these linguistic gains as a
result of study abroad, grammar has been shown to be equally, if not better, promoted in the formal
instruction context; most comparative studies of grammatical abilities in formal instruction vs. study
abroad learners have found that the classroom group as equal of superior to the study abroad groups in the
ability to monitor and accurately use grammatical forms (p. 16). A possible reason for such
discrepancies in findings across different components of the learners linguistic repertoire in the [second
language] concern the fact that strong emphasis is typically placed on the learners grammatical skills
during classroom instruction, such that the classroom may facilitate greater feedback on the learners
grammatical skills (Second language acquisition in a Study Abroad context: A comparative investigation

of the effects of study abroad and formal language instruction on the L2 learners grammatical
development, 2005, p. 501).
Noteworthy to the discussion on the superiority of one context, be it study abroad or formal
instruction, it is important to emphasize that this is not a discussion on study abroad versus formal
instruction but rather that it is the accumulated experience of formal instruction which may play a major
role in the relative benefits of a subsequent study abroad period enjoyed by the learner (p. 158). In other
words, study abroad provides the opportunity for learners to transfer (p. 158) their second language
knowledge and skills for use in the target community. While the transfer of knowledge from the former to
the latter is vital to success in study abroad, research shows that the immediate results of study abroad are
singular to that specific learning context.
It is important to continue the discussion of what constitutes a successful study abroad
experience. While the cognitive perspective would describe success in terms of linguistic ability, the
affective perspective would define it by the achievement of personal goals. AFS Intercultural Programs,
an international exchange program for students and adults, measures the learning outcomes from a study
abroad experience not by success or failure but by the participants progress in learning; personal
goalsdeveloping self-awareness, critical thinking and self-confidenceare seen as the foundation
(AFS Long Term Impact Study Report 2: Looking at Intercultural Sensitivity, Anxiety, and Experience
with Other Cultures, 2008, p. 2). The affective nature of this study abroad perspective is one of empathy,
respect, harmony, and a global understanding and appreciation of interdependence (p. 2). In a
comparative study done by AFS between participants who choose not to study abroad and those who did
showed that:
The AFS students showed considerably greater positive change on ten of the scales than
did the group who did not go abroad. These were, in order of importance: (1) Awareness
& Appreciation of Host Country & Culture; (2) Foreign Language Appreciation and

Ability; (3) Understanding Other Cultures; (4) International Awareness; (5) Adaptability;
(6) Awareness of Opportunities; (7) Critical Thinking; (8) Non-Materialism [and]; (9)
Independence/Responsibility for Self. (p. 3)
In a complementary AFS study, AFD Long Term Impact Study Report 1: 20 to 25 years after the
exchange experience, AFS alumni are compared with their peers (2008), researchers found that
there were many residual affective effects after the program. The first states that AFS alumni
interest in other cultures was passed down to the next generation; One of the strongest factors
distinguishing returnees from their peers is found in how they plan or hope to influence their own
children. Returnees who now have children are much more likely o strongly encourage their
children to meet people from other cultures (p. 3). In addition, 34% of the AFS returnees also
studied abroad as college or university students, compared with 22% of the control group (p.3).
Also, the study reported that those students who studied abroad feel more open around other
cultures; Prior to their departure, they were very similar to their friends in their level of comfort
around other cultures, but post-experience, they were much less anxious, irritated, defensive or
embarrassed around other cultures, while their friends showed no change (p. 5). All in all, the
data show that the lower levels of anxiety (or higher levels of comfort) around other
cultures that students gain during their experience abroad do in fact remain with them long
after, [approximately] 20-25 years, their experience abroad (p. 7). To further extrapolate this
point, this suggests that life experience such as that of the [study abroad] group in general may
be related to increased levels of intercultural sensitivity (p. 7). Albeit, the AFS study places a
high emphasize on affective results of study abroad, it is also poignant to note the relationship
between these affective results and cognitive results. This study further combines the results of
the intercultural sensitive levels of the participants in order to characterize the students according
to the development of cultural understanding (p.4). In other words, using the affective results to
determine further cognitive results of study abroad:

It is not by instincts alone or by just being in another culture that we come to understand
that culture, or to recognize that our own culture is one of many possible ways for groups
of people to organize their lives together. Rather, this is intercultural learning: the
recognition of cultural patterns, of grammar and syntax; the development of a greater
awareness or mindfulness when interacting with people from other cultures; and a greater
knowledge of the world and its people. These are mental processes, or more simply,
thinking. (AFS Long Term Impact Study Report 2: Looking at Intercultural Sensitivity,
Anxiety, and Experience with Other Cultures, 2008, p. 6)
All in all, there are many affective and cognitive benefits to study abroad and that these two
factors are not independent from each other but rather mutually supporting in the very way that the
intercultural development as outlined in both AFS reports includes this cognitive aspect of intercultural
learning as well as experiential ad emotional aspects (p. 6). And as far as formal instruction is
concerned, study abroad has been extensively shown to be superior with regards to the results affective
or cognitive. These affective and cognitive competencies acquired by study abroad participants can be
summarized as:
[The capability] to speak with greater ease and confidence, expressed in part by a greater
abundance of speech, spoken at a faster rate and characterized by fewer dysfluencysounding pauses. [These students] display a wider range of communicative strategies and
a broader repertoire of styles and their linguistic identities extend beyond the expected
acquisition of oral skills to a new self-realization in the social world of literacy.
(Learning context and its effects on second language acquisition, p. 158)
That being said, study abroad is invaluable in terms of linguistic and personal benefits that impact the
learners world language and cultural education.

The age at which these benefits come about is a guiding question in an array of studies on
sojourns abroad. AFS, whose programs specializes in high school exchange programs, stated: For the
AFS participants in the years 1980-81, and for their peers, university-level study abroad was not as
common as it is in the early 21st century (AFS Long Term Impact Study Report 2: Looking at
Intercultural Sensitivity, Anxiety, and Experience with Other Cultures, 2008, p. 3). This suggests that
study abroad at the secondary level has never been uncommon. Furthermore, AFS also states that the
AFS returnee group is clearly more likely than their control group peers [who did not study abroad] to
study abroad again at the university level (p. 3), therefore allowing for further expansion of linguistic
and cultural competencies. In addition, there are organizations, akin to AFS, that accept students as young
as 12 into their programs although most study abroad programs specify that students be between the
ages of 15 and 18 to participate in the traditional semester or yearlong programs in which a homestay is
combined with attendance at the local high school (Send them packing: Study abroad as option for gifted
students, 2000, p. 43). Moreover, some studies have shown greater benefits in older children than
university students, as a consequence of reported greater ability for contact opportunities among the
former (p. 164-5) in that students with more contact abilities expose themselves to more input while
abroad: those students who avail themselves of more opportunities to engage in conversation should be
in a better position to learn (The effect of context and input conditions on oral and written development:
A Study Abroad perspective, 2011, p. 161). Lastly, studies have shown that gifted or able learners get
more out of an experience abroad; [A] compelling argument can be made for the intrinsic value of

a multilingual, intercultural, transnational education. The cultural receptivity it affords is an end

in itself, of enormous value especially for the able learner" (Send them packing: Study abroad as
option for gifted students, 2000, p. 43). Taken as a whole, study abroad participants, at any age, are
positively affected by the experience but studies also suggest the value of such an experience at the
secondary level for those gifted and able learners.

Of course, there are many other factors that must be considered in the discussion of positive
cognitive and affective products as a result of the study abroad process. For one, studies have shown that
the duration of the stay impacts the results, however even short stay programs are beneficial except in
the areas of pronunciation and pragmatics (The effect of context and input conditions on oral and
written development: A Study Abroad perspective, 2011, p. 165). Also, the context in which the stay was
carried outwhether with a host family, with a homogeneous roommate, internshipaffects results as
well (p. 165). Of equal importance is the pre-departure level of linguistic proficiency; skill-acquisition
theory has established the hypothesis that a functional level of proficiency is needed for gains to appear as
a result of study abroad (p. 165), although it is interesting to note that lower level learners gain more out
the experience than higher level learners; Additionally, greater benefits seem to be obtained by learners
who find themselves at a threshold level characterized as intermediate over those at a higher level (p.
181) in that higher level learners may reach a ceiling effect where the level of input has leveled out.
More research needs to be done on the quantitative and culminating effects of a study abroad
experience, yet the benefits are easy to come bysimply ask any individual who has spent time abroad.
The benefits of study abroad at the secondary level are undeniable and for that reason it is a valuable
resource in linguistic and cultural development in secondary education.

Works Cited
Colletine, Joseph, and Barbara Freed. "The Effects of Study Abroad vs. Classroom Contexts on Spanish
SLA: Pedagogical and Programmatic Implications for Intermediate and Advanced Learners."
Studies on Secondary Language Acquisition 26 (2011). SSLA. Web. 27 Nov. 2011.
Colletine, Joseph, and Barbara Lafford. "The Effects of Study Abroad vs. Classroom Contexts on
Spanish SLA: Pedagogical and Programmatic Implications for Intermediate and Advanced
Learners." 2005. MS. Cornell University. Cornell University. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.
<http://www.lrc.cornell.edu/events/past/2004-5/Georgetown/collentine.pdf>.
Council on Standads for International Educational Travel. WIDESPREAD INTEREST IN
INTERNATIONAL YOUTH EXCHANGE REPORTED. CSIET.org. CSIET, 30 Mar. 2010. Web.
23 Nov. 2011. <http://www.csiet.org/media-center/documents/PressRelease-3-30-10.pdf>.
Emanoil, Pamela. "Study Abroad Expands Cultural View, Life Skills, and Academic Experience."
Human Ecology 27.3 (1999). Academic Search Complete. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.
Freed, Barbara F., Norman Segalowitz, and Dan P. Dewey. "CONTEXT OF LEARNING AND
SECOND LANGUAGE FLUENCY IN FRENCH: Comparing Regular Classroom, Study
Abroad, and Intensive Domestic Immersion Programs." Studies in Second Language Acquisition
26.02 (2004). Academic Search Premier. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.
Hansel, Bettina. "Report 1: 20 to 25 Years after the Exchaange Experience, AFS Alumni Are Compared
with Their Peers." Long Term Impact Study (2008). AFS. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.
Hansel, Bettina. "Report 2: Looking at Intercultural Sensitivity, Anxiety, and Experience with Other
Cultures." AFS Long Term Impact Study (2008). AFS Intercultural Education. Web. 25 Nov.
2011.
Howard, Martin. "Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context: A Comparative
Investigation of the Effects of Study Abroad and Formal Language Instruction on the L2
Learners Grammatical Development." Investigations in Instructed (2005). Academic Search
Premier. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.

Institute of International Education. Open Doors Report. Study Abroad by U.S. Students Rose in
2009/10. Institute of International Education. Institute of International Education, Inc, 14 Nov.
2011. Web. 27 Nov. 2011. <http://www.iie.org/en/Who-We-Are/News-and-Events/PressCenter/Press-Releases/2011/2011-11-14-Open-Doors-Study-Abroad>.
Lafford, Barbara A. "The Effects of Study Abroad vs. Classroom Contexts on Spanish SLA:
Pedagogical and Programmatic Implications for Intermediate and Advanced Learners."
Cascadilla Proceedings Project (2006). Arizona State University. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.
Lafford, Barbara A. "The Effect of Context of Learning (classroom vs. Study Abroad) on the Use of
Communication Strategies by Learners of Spanish as a Second Language." Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 26.2 (2004). SSLA. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.
Limburg-Weber, Lisa. "Send Them Packing: Study Abroad as Option for Gifted Students." Journal of
Secondary Gifted Education 11.2 (2000). Academic Search Premier. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.
Prez-Vidal, Carmen, and Maria Juan-Garau. "The Effect of Context and Input Conditions on Oral and
Written Development: A Study Abroad Perspective." International Review of Applied Linguistics
49 (2011). Academic Search Premier. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.